I believe the Way of the Celts have much to offer us today, I really do. I have looked at the life and teachings of great men such as Patrick and Columba, of the work established on Iona and I am impressed to say the least.

So I have been reading various modern celtic authors, notably J. Philip Newell.
While there is much in his writing to be commended - BUT - I have sadly come to the conclusion that what he teaches seems to be a mixture of celtic belief, with Roman teaching and not a small amount of Indian/Eastern belief.

I am struck with a disappointment that there is little or no mention of the the Name which above all Names, Jesus Christ. There is little reference to the Bible, no hint of the yardstick of belief it provides, no discussion of salvation issues, no solid teaching. All I see is fanciful notions mixed with eastern belief.

This is hardly the "strong meat" of the word! I find his ramblings of little substance with even less sustenance.

Worse than that, and not only in his writings, I find the whole "celtic scene" dominated by Rome and it's minions.
Let us never forget what "church" brought the destruction of the independence Celtic church, the same "beast" that has persecuted God's people for 2000 years, this is the same beast that more and more I find is laying claim to Celtic Spirituality.

I hope to provide a more detailed explanation (if required) to support this conclusion soon, but more importantly, I remain convinced that if the aforementioned saints had promoted the same ecumenical/new age clap-trap that passes itself off as celtic christianity today, then they would never have turned the world upsidedown, as they did.

I believe the Way of the Celts have much to offer us today, I really do. I have looked at the life and teachings of great men such as Patrick and Columba, of the work established on Iona and I am impressed to say the least.

So I have been reading various modern celtic authors, notably J. Philip Newell.
While there is much in his writing to be commended - BUT - I have sadly come to the conclusion that what he teaches seems to be a mixture of celtic belief, with Roman teaching and not a small amount of Indian/Eastern belief.

I am struck with a disappointment that there is little or no mention of the the Name which above all Names, Jesus Christ. There is little reference to the Bible, no hint of the yardstick of belief it provides, no discussion of salvation issues, no solid teaching. All I see is fanciful notions mixed with eastern belief.

This is hardly the "strong meat" of the word! I find his ramblings of little substance with even less sustenance.

Worse than that, and not only in his writings, I find the whole "celtic scene" dominated by Rome and it's minions.
Let us never forget what "church" brought the destruction of the independence Celtic church, the same "beast" that has persecuted God's people for 2000 years, this is the same beast that more and more I find is laying claim to Celtic Spirituality.

I hope to provide a more detailed explanation (if required) to support this conclusion soon, but more importantly, I remain convinced that if the aforementioned saints had promoted the same ecumenical/new age clap-trap that passes itself off as celtic christianity today, then they would never have turned the world upsidedown, as they did.

Obviously, the Celtic Way of Spirituality has much to offer this post-modern world! So, I'll agree with you on that!

One of the nicer features about CC is its ability to fit within the traditions we presently hold dear. As one girl put it on CCS, 'its like glasses that allow you to see the Scriptures from a Celtic view'. We come from all the traditions and sects that modern Christianity represent. Or, as a friend likes to say, 'we're a mixed bag of nuts'! (he's a Scotsman too!)

So, hold onto your past as you begin this journey! The Celts were as tenacious about Scripture as you are! They wouldn't, however, uphold the modern fundamentalist interpretation of it though.

As for Newell, he's human, he has his failing the same as the rest of us. Personally, I'm not impressed with his 'touchy feely' explanations for things! I prefer facts! One of his best works and is an excellent 'primer' for CC is 'Listening for the Heartbeat of God'. Give that a try, its more of an explanation than his 'Christ of the Celts'. I think you may find him more palatable in that one.

Regarding Rome's influence in CC, actually, its the Orthodox who claim it was all 'their idea'! Of course, Rome says the same as well as the Protestants claiming them as the first 'protesters' against Rome! The truth is, Celts are unique! We have a different view of Creation and our part in it. Thankfully, Patrick and the other early Celtic Saints had the good sense to go with the flow of how the Celtic peoples expressed their beliefs in the Source of Life. Long after Whitby, it was still alive in the hearts and minds of the Celtic peoples. Even my Irish grandmother had her own prayers apart from the Catholic ones. It survived every attempt to conform us!

Keep searching for the good.. you'll find plenty of it! Keep open to the leading of the Spirit, the journey has begun...

Well said Marty, as always, I do wish that Patrick and Columba had written more though, or maybe not, I was reading this morning Paul's admonishment to the Corinthians some of whom said "I am of Paul" another, "I am of Apollos".I am not of Patrick or Columba, but follow Christ.